FuryX users = Dust in the wind on these forums

Status
Not open for further replies.

Silentbob343

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 2, 2004
Messages
1,929
And nowadays people with PS4 and XBONE can stream to Twitch while gaming. Why would you build a system that can't accomplish what a console can do?

Lol, I will stay out of the AMD vs Intel cat fight, but I could not care less about streaming or if a console is capable of such. Everyone is different but that has zero impact on my hardware selection.
 

cocdod

Weaksauce
Joined
Aug 21, 2015
Messages
95
And nowadays people with PS4 and XBONE can stream to Twitch while gaming. Why would you build a system that can't accomplish what a console can do?

You can stream/record without any performance loss on any intel CPU since sandy bridge, even pentiums and i3's.
 

DejaWiz

Fully [H]
Joined
Apr 15, 2005
Messages
21,587
Oh man, I miss those days, back when AMD was on top!
Held on to a lot of 939 systems for many, many years, and I can see that Intel's first generation Core i 1366 platform is going to be the same thing for this decade, as well.

Good memories and good times! :cool:

Those were good times. I remember waiting anxiously for my Venice 3000+ pre-order to finally ship and deliver from Monarch. That little powerhouse took a 33% OC with a slight DECREASE in Vcore. Simply blew me away!

Then came an Opteron X2 (i think I got a 185) and I was amazed at what true multitasking was.

After that was a complete overhaul from 939 to AM2 when I was the lucky winner in a [H] giveaway for an A64 X2 6400+ BE. ...which ran all the way until I upgraded to my current 3770K after my intended path to BD was met with real disappointment with launch day reviews and I held off past SB to get PCIe 3.0 that IB introduced.

My next upgrade probably won't be until whatever the successors to Zen or Kaby Lake (maybe even Cannonlake) emerge...and whichever offers the best price : performance for my usuall 4-7 year CPU upgrade cycle.
 

Sharps97

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 12, 2000
Messages
413
My thoughts - as a Fury X user - they are "close enough" that it doesn't matter. I mean that in I am and have been a fan of AMD cards for a while. NVidia's current performance lead by itself isn't enough to make me change my mind (my history with them hasn't been good - bad luck or otherwise). I just got a 4K monitor, and at that resolution, we are generally talking single digit frame variance. And even with lower frames, Freesync does make a difference.

I certainly won't argue against the fact that the Ti is better. It is. But it also doesn't bother me all that much. I'm happy with it, it performs well at reasonable settings in the games I play. When the next gen comes out, I'll probably sell this for a little something and get the next top of the line.

At the end of the day, I'm not sure what everyone gets hung up about. Fury X isn't the fastest card. But it is by no means a slow or terrible performing card. It was just priced too high (the reasons for which are probably varied - creating a higher priced tier brand and badly needed margins).
 

razor1

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 14, 2005
Messages
10,120
Those were good times. I remember waiting anxiously for my Venice 3000+ pre-order to finally ship and deliver from Monarch. That little powerhouse took a 33% OC with a slight DECREASE in Vcore. Simply blew me away!

Then came an Opteron X2 (i think I got a 185) and I was amazed at what true multitasking was.

After that was a complete overhaul from 939 to AM2 when I was the lucky winner in a [H] giveaway for an A64 X2 6400+ BE. ...which ran all the way until I upgraded to my current 3770K after my intended path to BD was met with real disappointment with launch day reviews and I held off past SB to get PCIe 3.0 that IB introduced.

My next upgrade probably won't be until whatever the successors to Zen or Kaby Lake (maybe even Cannonlake) emerge...and whichever offers the best price : performance for my usuall 4-7 year CPU upgrade cycle.

Yeah the athlon's and x2 were just great CPU's, but they were priced higher than Intel at that time just like Intel is priced higher that AMD's now.

yep the upgrade cycles for CPU's have definitely slowed down and this is why everyone "thinks" the pc market is dying, its not really dying, its just saturated.

I too only upgrade CPU's 5 to 7 years but having 4 pc systems pretty much upgrade one to two years.

If Zen lake is solid or Kaby lake I probably will upgrade to one of them, but they gotta be 30% faster over all than Sky lake for me to even consider them otherwise the upgrade won't be worth it.
 

spaceace420

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 6, 2012
Messages
276
Yeah but them P4's could toast a marshmellow and heat a small apartment complex ;)

Wow the trolling has actually came full circle if you think about it, Crazy shit there.
 

CaptNumbNutz

Fully [H]
Joined
Apr 11, 2007
Messages
23,398
This thread is an epic fail as if users that buy hardware have one simple obligation to spam the crap out of this forum and forget about what they wanted todo with their new videocard turn into forum zealots because that is what you do when you buy a new videocard these days

And yet you just contributed to the epic fail by posting more offtopic stuff about CPU's like everyone else for the past 70 some posts. I hate to single you out as you are not the only one at fault here. Sorry. This thread was about video cards until someone mentioned CPU's in post #34 and then it was as if the whole forum had ADHD and had no desire to talk about the topic at hand.

Back to topic please! Let's talk about the the FuryX and why there are few user here... Oh wait, I think this discussion can be closed because we already determined why.
 
Last edited:

n=1

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 2, 2014
Messages
2,388
Yeah the athlon's and x2 were just great CPU's, but they were priced higher than Intel at that time just like Intel is priced higher that AMD's now.

yep the upgrade cycles for CPU's have definitely slowed down and this is why everyone "thinks" the pc market is dying, its not really dying, its just saturated.

I too only upgrade CPU's 5 to 7 years but having 4 pc systems pretty much upgrade one to two years.

If Zen lake is solid or Kaby lake I probably will upgrade to one of them, but they gotta be 30% faster over all than Sky lake for me to even consider them otherwise the upgrade won't be worth it.

30% over Skylake? Yeah I can't see that happening any time soon. Although I do think Skylake-E could be a very worthwhile upgrade, and I could easily see it becoming the next Sandy Bridge at the current pace.

And yet you just contributed to the epic fail by posting more offtopic stuff about CPU's like everyone else for the past 70 some posts. I hate to single you out as you are not the only one at fault here. Sorry. This thread was about video cards until someone mentioned CPU's in post #34 and then it was as if the whole forum had ADHD and had no desire to talk about the topic at hand.

Back to topic please! Let's talk about the the FuryX and why there are few user here... Oh wait, I think this discussion can be closed because we already determined why.

Eh to be fair even as an nVidia user I find these forums quite hostile to anything AMD, and every once while someone from the green camp simply feels compelled (or obligated by duty) to troll this forum. So totally understandable if a significant portion has shifted to OCN. Plus as someone pointed out earlier, the forums have become much less technical in recent years.
 

razor1

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 14, 2005
Messages
10,120
well the 4 desktops that I have,

workstation dual xeon 10 cores each Broadwell (I don't expect to upgrade this for another 5 years unless something spectacular comes out)

Haswell i7 4790k

2 systems both with skylake 6700k's

the next system to upgrade will be the Haswell, so yeah going to some serious update to upgrade that. (30% faster than that, sorry misspoke earlier)
 

KazeoHin

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
8,536
well the 4 desktops that I have,

workstation dual xeon 10 cores each Broadwell (I don't expect to upgrade this for another 5 years unless something spectacular comes out)

Haswell i7 4790k

2 systems both with skylake 6700k's

the next system to upgrade will be the Haswell, so yeah going to some serious update to upgrade that. (30% faster than that, sorry misspoke earlier)

Where did you get Broadwell-E xeons?

I ask genuinely, I'm looking to get moar cores.
 

Xinmosni

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 12, 2012
Messages
1,974
What the hell? Wasn't this thread supposed to be about Fury X ownership, not CPUs? Nevermind, I see now why I stopped visiting this side of the forum, ffs...
 

KazeoHin

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
8,536
What the hell? Wasn't this thread supposed to be about Fury X ownership, not CPUs? Nevermind, I see now why I stopped visiting this side of the forum, ffs...

To be fair, the fury X is such a boring product it can't even command its own thread.
 

KazeoHin

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
8,536
Fury X is actually a very interesting card.

I agree, mechanically and engineering wise, its quite an impressive piece of circuitry.

its when you look at it as an actual graphics card where it falls apart. There are no such things as bad products, only bad prices. And the Fury X has a terrible price.
 
Joined
May 20, 2011
Messages
925
I really like how this strarted as an AMD vs Nvidia thread but turned into an AMD vs Intel thread, in the video card section no less...
 

KazeoHin

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
8,536
I really like how this strarted as an AMD vs Nvidia thread but turned into an AMD vs Intel thread, in the video card section no less...

Well, again, in all fairness, it is AMD who decided to fight a war with two fronts. The name is associated with both CPUs and GPUs.
 

FearTheCow

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
May 2, 2006
Messages
6,112
I really like how this strarted as an AMD vs Nvidia thread but turned into an AMD vs Intel thread, in the video card section no less...

Well the thread was about why no one is discussing a specific AMD video card. Now as usual, it did not take more than a couple posts before Nvidia/Intel fanbois decided to shit all over the thread instead of actually discussing the topic, thus showing, in a round about manner, why no one is talking about said video card.

It is pretty much impossible to discuss anything in this particular sub-forum due to the "regulars" who pretty much shit on every thread.
 

Xinmosni

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 12, 2012
Messages
1,974
Well the thread was about why no one is discussing a specific AMD video card. Now as usual, it did not take more than a couple posts before Nvidia/Intel fanbois decided to shit all over the thread instead of actually discussing the topic, thus showing, in a round about manner, why no one is talking about said video card.

It is pretty much impossible to discuss anything in this particular sub-forum due to the "regulars" who pretty much shit on every thread.

This, darkstarcow, hence my response. I'm not sure if some people were just responding genuinely (whereas a couple were most obviously trolling), so I kept myself from calling the BS out.

I guess things are so boring about the other companies that trolls have to hang out on competitors' threads? Same can be said about Nintendo discussions.
 

new2019

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 29, 2012
Messages
1,563
"AMD vs Nvidia"
Oh, when will they ever learn?
Oh, when will they ever learn?
 

Mchart

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 7, 2004
Messages
5,533
I agree, mechanically and engineering wise, its quite an impressive piece of circuitry.

its when you look at it as an actual graphics card where it falls apart. There are no such things as bad products, only bad prices. And the Fury X has a terrible price.

IMO it's a bad product from a company that is supposed to be making money. Again; Having a stock radiator based water cooler that won't fit in many cases and/or just scares potential consumers off was just an idiotic decision. It should have been offered as an option, not the base requirement. If they couldn't clock the card to the speeds they needed on air then they should have done things differently.

It's a solid bet they originally intended to release it on air but when confronted with the competition were forced to do a last minute overclock to close the gap. Given that it doesn't even overclock much

Yes, it's cool from an engineering point of view but it's an exercise in complication does not make for a good consumer product. I personally don't understand why anyone would buy one. The 'lower end' ATI cards aren't that far off in performance and don't have the stupid radiator requirement, and of course the competition is so strong that you'd need a very niche reason to choose the fury x. I'd be pissed as a AMD shareholder personally; This was a poorly executed product. All of this answers why you don't see many people talking about it on here. Not many bought one.
 
Last edited:

KazeoHin

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
8,536
IMO it's a bad product from a company that is supposed to be making money. Again; Having a stock radiator based water cooler that won't fit in many cases and/or just scares potential consumers off was just an idiotic decision. It should have been offered as an option, not the base requirement. If they couldn't clock the card to the speeds they needed on air then they should have done things differently.

It's a solid bet they originally intended to release it on air but when confronted with the competition were forced to do a last minute overclock to close the gap. Given that it doesn't even overclock much

Yes, it's cool from an engineering point of view but it's an exercise in complication does not make for a good consumer product. I personally don't understand why anyone would buy one. The 'lower end' ATI cards aren't that far off in performance and don't have the stupid radiator requirement, and of course the competition is so strong that you'd need a very niche reason to choose the fury x. I'd be pissed as a AMD shareholder personally; This was a poorly executed product.

Actually, rumours and leaked pictures showed the product was designed from the ground-up for AIO cooling. Before the 980 Ti, Titan X cards were selling quite well at $1000 US, Nvidia chose to cannibalise their Titan X sales by releasing the 980Ti using the same GPU and being roughly the same exact speed, for $350 less. That move definitely hurt AMD, as THEY were the ones to release the 'cheaper' alternative: The Fury X 1.0. I'm guessing it was going to be a little bit more than 10% slower than the Titan X, but cost 35% less. A great deal, right!? Well, Nvidia basically unzipped its pants and gave a big, damp turkey-slap to AMD in the form of the 980Ti. Released minutes before AMD was going to announce their Fury X, basically destroying that market slot by doing EXACTLY what AMD wanted to do, only with a card faster and cooler than what AMD was potentially going to offer. So AMD delayed the launch and rushed back to their lab to pump out a new BIOS for the card that pushed it to its absolute limit. That card with the updated BIOS is the Fury X we now have. A few percent behind the 980Ti, and absolutely struggling to OC at all.

If AMD didn't work on a Fury X, we would not have a 980 Ti. The 980 Ti was entirely a reactive move by Nvidia to make the Fury X fall flat on its face. It worked too. In a world where the 980 Ti didn't exist, the Fury X would have been an awesome product. it would have been 10% slower than the fastest card on the market, but 35% cheaper! it would have had an awesome position.
 

chenw

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 26, 2014
Messages
3,977
It's a gamble that paid off, unless nVidia had some insider info as to how well Fury X will perform.

If Fury X had turned out to be better than 980ti at the same price, it would have also been the same position as 980ti is in at the moment, maybe a little less, depending on how much bottleneck that 4GB VRAM vs 6GB really is.

I'd the the largest nail in the coffin in the Fury X is the 4GB VRAM vs 980ti's 6GB. Even if the extra VRAM is entirely marketing ploy, it's still 2GB free VRAM, assuming Fury X and 980ti have the same performance.

The core and the implementation of the HBM isn't bad, it's pretty much everything else about the card that worked against it. (Lack of HDMI 2.0, AIO only cooling, etc etc).
 

KickAssCop

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 19, 2003
Messages
7,012
Fury X with the price drop (if it indeed was true) is a decent card in the 580-ish price range (unless you buy a Jet.com 980 Ti at similar price).

However, the 980 Ti with its overclocked models can be as fast as 15-25% depending on resolution and settings and further overclocks yield even more performance. I think that warrants the 650 tag for the 980 Ti.

Either way, due to my past history with AMD drivers that was less than stellar, I continue to use NVidia cards since performance is definitely higher and drivers feel stronger.
 

bboynitrous

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 29, 2004
Messages
2,514
Almost everybody is at ocn now.
As you can see this is basically a nvidia forum.
I stopped posting stuff because every time you post something good about amd, is like a war where you can't defend your view point or whatever is good about amd. Defend yourself and is going to be a free vacation for you.

This. Even if the card isn't faster there could be some potential with it but no one will even dare say anything, otherwise the Nvidia Troll Patrol runs through the thread immediately. I really find myself coming here less and less. I'm not a dumbass either, I know the 980Ti is faster card right now but video card section of the forum is just turning to shit.
 

Michaelius

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 8, 2003
Messages
4,684
Some modern games require a quad nowadays or you have to edit .ini files to fool the game into running on a dual core. Or you can just buy something that runs the same game at 60 fps without editing files. In another words for gaming an i3 is useless. And nowadays people with PS4 and XBONE can stream to Twitch while gaming. Why would you build a system that can't accomplish what a console can do?

They require 4 threads which i3 has not 4 cores.The only place where this helps AMD is against Pentium which otherwise would annihilate whole budget range of theirs.
 

Chris_B

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
May 29, 2001
Messages
5,282
This. Even if the card isn't faster there could be some potential with it but no one will even dare say anything, otherwise the Nvidia Troll Patrol runs through the thread immediately. I really find myself coming here less and less. I'm not a dumbass either, I know the 980Ti is faster card right now but video card section of the forum is just turning to shit.

Time the mods stepped it up instead of sitting back and letting it happen.
 

Flopper

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 15, 2007
Messages
1,642
This. Even if the card isn't faster there could be some potential with it but no one will even dare say anything, otherwise the Nvidia Troll Patrol runs through the thread immediately. I really find myself coming here less and less. I'm not a dumbass either, I know the 980Ti is faster card right now but video card section of the forum is just turning to shit.

its equal in any way and the Hardocp bias wont help the amd user either.
Benchmarks getting old to measure what kind of experience you have gaming.

I buy amd simply due to its better hardware and software than whatever Nvidia will offer.
Buddy of mine change drivers more often than a bunny humps due to him having issues with his fps on his Nvidia card.

Smooth sailing on amd :D
 

TaintedSquirrel

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Aug 5, 2013
Messages
11,274
It's hard to tell if you were trolling without context. You can recommend AMD hardware without being a dick about it.
We've had several "GTX 960 vs 380" threads recently with plenty of recommendations for the 380 and nobody got in trouble.

If someone says, "Hey guys I just got a new GTX 970" and your response is "sell it and get a 290x is about same price or cheaper", that's trolling. So it sounds like you're baiting the staff.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top